Re: [hlds] Linux srcds performance unacceptable
srcds performance on linux has gone down to two-patches-ago (not counting the patches between goldrush and now) levels for me with today's patch (though the goldrush map in particular still runs 10% higher than something like dustbowl) and I hear windows servers got a similar bump Yay valve! Keep going! - Neph ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Linux srcds performance unacceptable
Just to clarify, you're saying that the performance is now better (again)? Last update made it real bad, this update seems to have made it good again, or at least that's what I've noticed. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nephyrin Zey Sent: Friday, May 02, 2008 4:45 PM To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list; Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list Subject: Re: [hlds] Linux srcds performance unacceptable srcds performance on linux has gone down to two-patches-ago (not counting the patches between goldrush and now) levels for me with today's patch (though the goldrush map in particular still runs 10% higher than something like dustbowl) and I hear windows servers got a similar bump Yay valve! Keep going! - Neph ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Linux srcds performance unacceptable
Two patches ago levels == how it ran on the patch before the patch before goldrush. Both the patch before goldrush and the goldrush patch hurt performance, and its now at levels similar to prior to both of those. Still a bit higher than it was when i first started hosting servers, and higher than it should be, but better. - Neph On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Tony Paloma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just to clarify, you're saying that the performance is now better (again)? Last update made it real bad, this update seems to have made it good again, or at least that's what I've noticed. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nephyrin Zey Sent: Friday, May 02, 2008 4:45 PM To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list; Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list Subject: Re: [hlds] Linux srcds performance unacceptable srcds performance on linux has gone down to two-patches-ago (not counting the patches between goldrush and now) levels for me with today's patch (though the goldrush map in particular still runs 10% higher than something like dustbowl) and I hear windows servers got a similar bump Yay valve! Keep going! - Neph ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Linux srcds performance unacceptable
I might've spoken a bit too soon on this - the servers do still get up into the high nineties CPU usage and stay there for a while - it seems like after they've been running for a while their overall CPU usage drifted back up to about the same as before the patch. This might be the first ever case of CPU Leaks :-/ The server also still incurs minor memory leaks, which seem to be about the same since before the patch. I run two 32x linux servers that are nearly always full and occasionally empty out at night. Here are some pretty graphs: http://www.nephyrin.net/NemuCPU.png Shows Load Average. On thursday it was lower despite both servers being full (???). The big spike today is the patch. The servers were both *instantly full* after the patch (among the first online) and have been *constantly full* since, yet the CPU usage over the past three hours has drifted up to pre-patch levels... http://nephyrin.net/NemuMem.png Memory Usage over a longer period - note that i went from one to two servers on tuesday, so the memory leaks have actually remained about the same as before. If anyone from Valve wants a login to my stats system let me know. It has tons and tons of pretty graphs dating to back when the server started. - Neph On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 5:00 PM, Nephyrin Zey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Two patches ago levels == how it ran on the patch before the patch before goldrush. Both the patch before goldrush and the goldrush patch hurt performance, and its now at levels similar to prior to both of those. Still a bit higher than it was when i first started hosting servers, and higher than it should be, but better. - Neph ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Linux srcds performance unacceptable
I have noticed a decrease in performance, too. I'm running 32 slot server on X3350 quad-core xeon. Previously I had about 30-40% peak cpu usage for one core, now its about 50-70%. The server fps tends to drop to 40 sometimes... *clap*clap* Quoting Nephyrin Zey [EMAIL PROTECTED]: You can start a vanilla server with +maxplayers 32 and it will run. Valve IS one step away from naming the custom tab 'unsupported servers we hate', but that's besides the point. No hacks. But guess what? The server performs poorly on 24 players too. And 1 player. In fact, it just performs poorly. The title wasn't performance above 24 players is poor. Pretend I have a Xeon 3040 and am running a 24-slot server. Same complaint. Thanks for your opportune jumping into to act high-and-mighty because you support valve's max players recommendation, but it's not relevant to this thread. - Neph On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 9:14 PM, Kevin Ottalini [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nephyrin: TF2 is designed for 24 player servers not 32. Asking Valve to support a hacked server is very silly and will get you nowhere. Threatening Valve is not an intelligent or beneficial life choice. Revert, repent and play. - Original Message - From: Nephyrin Zey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list hlds@list.valvesoftware.com; Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 8:38 PM Subject: [hlds] Linux srcds performance unacceptable Dear VALVe: With the newest patch, my dual core 2.4GHz conroe xeon can no longer run a server on each core. Because the game still doesn't support multithreading, this means i can't run servers at all without maxing out a core. With 32-players on the server the FPS drops below 100 and while it still is smooth, I'm one patch away from not being able to run a single 32-slot server on a dual core xeon. This is absurd. When I started this box I was averaging like 70% per core, ~80% with sourcetv+autorecord. Now its at like 95% and my load average is hovering slightly above 2.0 Please, please, please work on server performance. There is no reason this much power should be required. Simple tweaks like fixing the way overuse of expensive kernel calls (gettimeofday, etc.), improving the obscenely stupid frame/tick system scheduling, etc, would yield massive benefits. If the next patch furthers the cpu usage increasing trend, I *will* be taking my servers offline, as I'm not upgrading (again) to keep up with bloat. Please look at this, or risk me breaking into your offices and optimizing the engine by force. - Neph ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Linux srcds performance unacceptable
On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 20:38:51 -0700, Nephyrin Zey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (snip) Because the game still doesn't support multithreading I'm not so sure. We are also noticing bad performance, running ONE 24 player server on a dual-core AMD 3800. I have two monitors, and have gkrellm running in the top one to check server performance. At the exact moment we experience lag in-game, the server is maxing out of both cores. Normally it runs 60-70% on one core, with the other core doing ~5%. Even if the server proper is only one core, SOMETHING the server is doing is resulting in both cores being used for around 5 seconds every minute or so. frymaster on behalf of localhost ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Linux srcds performance unacceptable
Neph try it with 24 slots I have 2 24 slot private servers running on a similar rig. Admittedly they dont get a huge amount of traffic (due to what their used for) but t runs absolutely fine (this is on Ubuntu 7.10 even) On 4/30/08, localhost [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 20:38:51 -0700, Nephyrin Zey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (snip) Because the game still doesn't support multithreading I'm not so sure. We are also noticing bad performance, running ONE 24 player server on a dual-core AMD 3800. I have two monitors, and have gkrellm running in the top one to check server performance. At the exact moment we experience lag in-game, the server is maxing out of both cores. Normally it runs 60-70% on one core, with the other core doing ~5%. Even if the server proper is only one core, SOMETHING the server is doing is resulting in both cores being used for around 5 seconds every minute or so. frymaster on behalf of localhost ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds -- Thomas Morton Lead Developer || Founder TomNRob Web Services www.tomnrob.com ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Linux srcds performance unacceptable
At 11:38 PM 4/29/2008, Nephyrin Zey wrote: Dear VALVe: With the newest patch, my dual core 2.4GHz conroe xeon can no longer run a server on each core. Because the game still doesn't support multithreading, this means i can't run servers at all without maxing out a core. With 32-players on the server the FPS drops below 100 and while it still is smooth, I'm one patch away from not being able to run a single 32-slot server on a dual core xeon. This is absurd. When I started this box I was averaging like 70% per core, ~80% with sourcetv+autorecord. Now its at like 95% and my load average is hovering slightly above 2.0 It looks like it does support threading; but not what you think. All server I/O is processed by 1 thread, and the other thread is VAC?. Please, please, please work on server performance. There is no reason this much power should be required. Simple tweaks like fixing the way overuse of expensive kernel calls (gettimeofday, etc.), improving the obscenely stupid frame/tick system scheduling, etc, would yield massive benefits. If the next patch furthers the cpu usage increasing trend, I *will* be taking my servers offline, as I'm not upgrading (again) to keep up with bloat. Source on windows does not use gettimeofday; that is *NIX only. System calls, generally, are expensive. Windows 2003 uses PIT/ACPI to drive clocks, which effects things like sleep(). I think Sleep() on windows is expensive to call because calling Sleep() reads the PIT/ACPI, which requires an ioport read, which is very expensive.. I'm not sure on this; but that would explain why I see so much jitter from sleep() calls Windows 2008 uses HPET to service interrupts and timing, and it's faster than the former. Gary Stanley - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/~gary Put your hand on a hot stove for a minute, and it seems like an hour. Sit with a pretty girl for an hour, and it seems like a minute. THAT'S relativity. - Albert Einstein ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Linux srcds performance unacceptable
Nephyrin: TF2 is designed for 24 player servers not 32. Asking Valve to support a hacked server is very silly and will get you nowhere. Threatening Valve is not an intelligent or beneficial life choice. Revert, repent and play. - Original Message - From: Nephyrin Zey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list hlds@list.valvesoftware.com; Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 8:38 PM Subject: [hlds] Linux srcds performance unacceptable Dear VALVe: With the newest patch, my dual core 2.4GHz conroe xeon can no longer run a server on each core. Because the game still doesn't support multithreading, this means i can't run servers at all without maxing out a core. With 32-players on the server the FPS drops below 100 and while it still is smooth, I'm one patch away from not being able to run a single 32-slot server on a dual core xeon. This is absurd. When I started this box I was averaging like 70% per core, ~80% with sourcetv+autorecord. Now its at like 95% and my load average is hovering slightly above 2.0 Please, please, please work on server performance. There is no reason this much power should be required. Simple tweaks like fixing the way overuse of expensive kernel calls (gettimeofday, etc.), improving the obscenely stupid frame/tick system scheduling, etc, would yield massive benefits. If the next patch furthers the cpu usage increasing trend, I *will* be taking my servers offline, as I'm not upgrading (again) to keep up with bloat. Please look at this, or risk me breaking into your offices and optimizing the engine by force. - Neph ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Linux srcds performance unacceptable
OMG really come on Please explain how a 32 player TF2 server is a Hacked server Please don't start this war up once more this will be the 5th one now From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 21:14:53 -0700 Subject: Re: [hlds] Linux srcds performance unacceptable Nephyrin: TF2 is designed for 24 player servers not 32. Asking Valve to support a hacked server is very silly and will get you nowhere. Threatening Valve is not an intelligent or beneficial life choice. Revert, repent and play. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Linux srcds performance unacceptable
You can start a vanilla server with +maxplayers 32 and it will run. Valve IS one step away from naming the custom tab 'unsupported servers we hate', but that's besides the point. No hacks. But guess what? The server performs poorly on 24 players too. And 1 player. In fact, it just performs poorly. The title wasn't performance above 24 players is poor. Pretend I have a Xeon 3040 and am running a 24-slot server. Same complaint. Thanks for your opportune jumping into to act high-and-mighty because you support valve's max players recommendation, but it's not relevant to this thread. - Neph On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 9:14 PM, Kevin Ottalini [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nephyrin: TF2 is designed for 24 player servers not 32. Asking Valve to support a hacked server is very silly and will get you nowhere. Threatening Valve is not an intelligent or beneficial life choice. Revert, repent and play. - Original Message - From: Nephyrin Zey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list hlds@list.valvesoftware.com; Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 8:38 PM Subject: [hlds] Linux srcds performance unacceptable Dear VALVe: With the newest patch, my dual core 2.4GHz conroe xeon can no longer run a server on each core. Because the game still doesn't support multithreading, this means i can't run servers at all without maxing out a core. With 32-players on the server the FPS drops below 100 and while it still is smooth, I'm one patch away from not being able to run a single 32-slot server on a dual core xeon. This is absurd. When I started this box I was averaging like 70% per core, ~80% with sourcetv+autorecord. Now its at like 95% and my load average is hovering slightly above 2.0 Please, please, please work on server performance. There is no reason this much power should be required. Simple tweaks like fixing the way overuse of expensive kernel calls (gettimeofday, etc.), improving the obscenely stupid frame/tick system scheduling, etc, would yield massive benefits. If the next patch furthers the cpu usage increasing trend, I *will* be taking my servers offline, as I'm not upgrading (again) to keep up with bloat. Please look at this, or risk me breaking into your offices and optimizing the engine by force. - Neph ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Linux srcds performance unacceptable
I think it's more that windows servers simply out preform linux servers. since windows servers were not working at first after the update today I tossed up a tf2 server on a box not to different from the windows one we run. 2.6Ghz p4 Linux vs 3Ghz p4 Windows. The windows box can handle 24 players with a tick rate of 66 and not lag due to cpu usage. On the linux box with 16 players it lags really bad and the cpu is pegged even with 14 players. Outside of the max players all other tf2/source settings are the same and no addons. Nephyrin Zey wrote: You can start a vanilla server with +maxplayers 32 and it will run. Valve IS one step away from naming the custom tab 'unsupported servers we hate', but that's besides the point. No hacks. But guess what? The server performs poorly on 24 players too. And 1 player. In fact, it just performs poorly. The title wasn't performance above 24 players is poor. Pretend I have a Xeon 3040 and am running a 24-slot server. Same complaint. Thanks for your opportune jumping into to act high-and-mighty because you support valve's max players recommendation, but it's not relevant to this thread. - Neph On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 9:14 PM, Kevin Ottalini [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nephyrin: TF2 is designed for 24 player servers not 32. Asking Valve to support a hacked server is very silly and will get you nowhere. Threatening Valve is not an intelligent or beneficial life choice. Revert, repent and play. - Original Message - From: Nephyrin Zey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list hlds@list.valvesoftware.com; Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 8:38 PM Subject: [hlds] Linux srcds performance unacceptable Dear VALVe: With the newest patch, my dual core 2.4GHz conroe xeon can no longer run a server on each core. Because the game still doesn't support multithreading, this means i can't run servers at all without maxing out a core. With 32-players on the server the FPS drops below 100 and while it still is smooth, I'm one patch away from not being able to run a single 32-slot server on a dual core xeon. This is absurd. When I started this box I was averaging like 70% per core, ~80% with sourcetv+autorecord. Now its at like 95% and my load average is hovering slightly above 2.0 Please, please, please work on server performance. There is no reason this much power should be required. Simple tweaks like fixing the way overuse of expensive kernel calls (gettimeofday, etc.), improving the obscenely stupid frame/tick system scheduling, etc, would yield massive benefits. If the next patch furthers the cpu usage increasing trend, I *will* be taking my servers offline, as I'm not upgrading (again) to keep up with bloat. Please look at this, or risk me breaking into your offices and optimizing the engine by force. - Neph ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Linux srcds performance unacceptable
The linux srcds build has always been less efficient than the windows version, the problem is both the linux and windows versions are relatively inefficient overall, and have been taking up more CPU each patch. Valve really needs to start making this a priority, because the cost of hosting is getting obscene. - Neph On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 10:33 PM, lart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think it's more that windows servers simply out preform linux servers. since windows servers were not working at first after the update today I tossed up a tf2 server on a box not to different from the windows one we run. 2.6Ghz p4 Linux vs 3Ghz p4 Windows. The windows box can handle 24 players with a tick rate of 66 and not lag due to cpu usage. On the linux box with 16 players it lags really bad and the cpu is pegged even with 14 players. Outside of the max players all other tf2/source settings are the same and no addons. Nephyrin Zey wrote: You can start a vanilla server with +maxplayers 32 and it will run. Valve IS one step away from naming the custom tab 'unsupported servers we hate', but that's besides the point. No hacks. But guess what? The server performs poorly on 24 players too. And 1 player. In fact, it just performs poorly. The title wasn't performance above 24 players is poor. Pretend I have a Xeon 3040 and am running a 24-slot server. Same complaint. Thanks for your opportune jumping into to act high-and-mighty because you support valve's max players recommendation, but it's not relevant to this thread. - Neph On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 9:14 PM, Kevin Ottalini [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nephyrin: TF2 is designed for 24 player servers not 32. Asking Valve to support a hacked server is very silly and will get you nowhere. Threatening Valve is not an intelligent or beneficial life choice. Revert, repent and play. - Original Message - From: Nephyrin Zey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list hlds@list.valvesoftware.com; Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 8:38 PM Subject: [hlds] Linux srcds performance unacceptable Dear VALVe: With the newest patch, my dual core 2.4GHz conroe xeon can no longer run a server on each core. Because the game still doesn't support multithreading, this means i can't run servers at all without maxing out a core. With 32-players on the server the FPS drops below 100 and while it still is smooth, I'm one patch away from not being able to run a single 32-slot server on a dual core xeon. This is absurd. When I started this box I was averaging like 70% per core, ~80% with sourcetv+autorecord. Now its at like 95% and my load average is hovering slightly above 2.0 Please, please, please work on server performance. There is no reason this much power should be required. Simple tweaks like fixing the way overuse of expensive kernel calls (gettimeofday, etc.), improving the obscenely stupid frame/tick system scheduling, etc, would yield massive benefits. If the next patch furthers the cpu usage increasing trend, I *will* be taking my servers offline, as I'm not upgrading (again) to keep up with bloat. Please look at this, or risk me breaking into your offices and optimizing the engine by force. - Neph ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
